If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Faulting the officer for his actions is placing the blame on the resulting problem not the source. That snake never should have been there in the first place. I grew up 10 miles from where this happened and trust me a Boa could not survive the winters there its too cold. The truly reprehensible thing is that the person who owned this snake did not take adequate precautions to prevent its escape or let it loose instead of finding someone to take care of it. The officer reacted as he saw fit to protect the public.

Honestly I think these large non-native snakes should have small electronic tracking tags put in them and the ownership of the snake registered to the person who bought it. I don't usually support these types of gov't regulations but if the hobby can not create responsible owners on its own then something to force responsible ownership is needed. You need a dog license to have a dog why shouldn't you need on for a large snake.

And for the record plenty of feral dogs that were endangering the public have been shot by police in that area, it just usually doesn't make the news as a feral dog is not that uncommon.

As for the wrong ID, well the chronicle is a newspaper not a biologists station and I pretty sure they don't have any snake experts on the staff.

"We're terrible animals. I think that the Earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us, as well it should." - Kurt Vonnegut

scotty you cant exactly use that against anything, you cant disclose the snakes natural instinct, if it is threatened it will attack, or if it is hungry, and feels the person is sizable, its prey. I have owned MANY snakes in my life, to list a few, albino burmese python, carpet python, ball python, tiger-ball python, Red tailed boa, Tree boa, etc. I never once had an issue with my snakes, and my Albino Burmese was 14 1/2 feet. People shooting the snakes because they are stressed/confused/hungry, would be no different than shooting any other pet/animal, or even human, for showing the same behavior. IMO the officers are completely out of line.

Faulting the officer for his actions is placing the blame on the resulting problem not the source. That snake never should have been there in the first place. I grew up 10 miles from where this happened and trust me a Boa could not survive the winters there its too cold. The truly reprehensible thing is that the person who owned this snake did not take adequate precautions to prevent its escape or let it loose instead of finding someone to take care of it. The officer reacted as he saw fit to protect the public.

actually by shooting at the snake he created a greater danger to the public......once he was there there was basically no danger to anyone.......bullet ricochets can and do kill

Honestly I think these large non-native snakes should have small electronic tracking tags put in them and the ownership of the snake registered to the person who bought it. I don't usually support these types of gov't regulations but if the hobby can not create responsible owners on its own then something to force responsible ownership is needed. You need a dog license to have a dog why shouldn't you need on for a large snake.

than the same should be required of any dog over bout 30 pounds.....i live in an area where rattlesnakes are moderately common.....im far more likely to be hurt or killed by a dog than one of the many rattlesnakes that are around....hell horses kill more ppl in the US than dogs and snakes combined

As for the wrong ID, well the chronicle is a newspaper not a biologists station and I pretty sure they don't have any snake experts on the staff.
as someone who actually runs two papers thats horse chit.......that is actually a huge mistake and would be a strike against a reporter on our staff.....why? cause its a mistake that was made cause the reporter refused to take the 30 seconds it would have required to check it out on Google......according to the story the reporter took the time to look up to see if this kind of thing was a problem.....it also says what size they can attain.....so they infact looked up burmese pythons but it didnt occur to them the two snakes look different? hell the wife makes me double check stuff the Montana Fish and Game tells us......if a reporter on our payroll did this kinda basic mistakes more than a few times they would be looking for a new job cause if they cant handle this they have no business trying to cover topics such as school board or county commissioner meetings

Rattler, your making some huge assumptions here. Boas have killed people, just as bullet ricochets have. You were not present at the scene so how can you accurately judge all of the conditions to judge what was more dangerous. You also have to take into account his level of knowledge about snakes. The officer does not have your level of knowledge about snakes, for all he knows it could have been a venomous snake. All he could tell likely was that it was not a native snake as Michigan doesn't have any that get that large that I am aware. Based on his knowledge of the situation he made the choice that was the best course of action his his opinion.

Secondly I think there should be better control of dogs. Too many people are irresponsible pet owners. Also it is required in Ottawa county that any dog regardless of size have a license. So why would large snake require one too?

As for the wrong ID I re-read the article and a pet store in the area gave the wrong ID. I imagine the paper accepted that opinion as an expert in the field, should they have well thats questionable, but the chronicle is not the best paper out there.

"We're terrible animals. I think that the Earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us, as well it should." - Kurt Vonnegut

Both of you are using cum hoc ergo propter hoc arguments which just do not work logically.

Scott,

Finding one article of a snake killing someone does not mean they all will. I can use google too. Try the following words: Dog, attacks, child. You get 879,000 hits.

So then, by your argument style, dogs (all dogs) are not harmless.

Now both you and I know that that is a load of B.S. The same is true with using the article you cite to make the sweeping generalization you made.

Also, just so you are aware, the article you cite actually supports my argument. Most people who do not have any experience with keeping snakes are ignorant of what snake keepers call "aggressive feed response." You see, snakes, like many animals, can develop a Pavlovian response. Keepers who feed their snakes inside their cages condition the snake into thinking that whenever the cage is opened it is food time. And, as such, the snakes immediately and instinctively go into hunt mode every time the cage opens regardless of the intent of the owner. But once this same snake is out of the cage it no longer behaves in this manner. I have seen snakes that are so violent in their aggressive feed responses that they have to be removed from their cages with tongs but these same snakes once out of the cage are able to be passed around classrooms for children to handle.

I stand by my contention that the snake in this case was a danger to no one. And the cop was way way way out of line.

ktulu,

You do not need a license to own a dog. Animal agencies would like for people to have their dogs registered through the rabies vaccination program so as to help insure we keep the incidence of domestic canine rabies down (never mind the fact that the US was declared domestic canine rabies free last year...) but there is nothing that says a person has to do it. And the registration has diddly to do with knowing who owns what dog in the event the dog gets loose... Unless the dog is chipped (and most are not) then you can not know who it belongs to whether or not it is registered. So, using your argument, if a dog gets loose it should be viewed in exactly the same manner as this snake was viewed. And you can not know if the dog is chipped from afar so then you would then have to treat all dogs in the way this snake was treated. Of course that will never happen because people would be up in arms about every loose dog being shot by cops because we all love dogs, they are fluffy and friendly and man's best friend. Of course we should kill every snake we see cause everyone knows snakes are satan incarnate and slimy and evil.

And for the record many snake owners have begun chipping their animals. Hell, for all we know that snake may have been chipped, I'd bet good money the cops never bothered to wave a wand over the dead body to find out.

You also have to take into account his level of knowledge about snakes. The officer does not have your level of knowledge about snakes, for all he knows it could have been a venomous snake. All he could tell likely was that it was not a native snake as Michigan doesn't have any that get that large that I am aware. Based on his knowledge of the situation he made the choice that was the best course of action his his opinion.

On this comment... I can see what you are getting at but if the hick in the truck could get close (he said he knew it was a "python" even from inside his truck) then the cop probably could have known as well. And I would guess the hick in the truck probably talked to the cop so the cop probably did know it was non-venomous. All that is an aside though. The cop should have contacted animal control. That would have been the responsible thing to do. I guarantee if it had been anything other than a snake/reptile that animal control would have been contacted to deal with it. But because it was a snake it was immediately demonized and so blowing it away with a gun is a totally legitimate action. That is a crap train of logic and it sickens me. It is blatant and willful ignorance. It is STUPIDITY.

And I agree with Rattler that the reporter ought be lashed for not bothering to actually do his research. A "pet store in the area gave the ID" probably translates to a 16 year old working in the store for a summer job gave the ID. I would not trust any run of the mill pet store to provide a proper ID on a reptile. The reporter was lazy. It is as simple as that.

'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

and Dogs are totally irrelevant to this case, so I wont even bother with the dog debate.

I am using a familiar animal to make correlations. That is not irrelevant.

This is a case of a loose pet that was shot in a public street. If it was a dog people would be up in arms but because it is a snake people think it is okay. It does not matter what the animal was, dog, cat, mouse, snake, turtle, frog, tarantula, goat, chicken, squirrel, the point is that the manner in which the situation was "resolved" is crap and justifying it with "well it was a snake so it is okay" is a load and a half.

And the argument that "well some snakes have killed people so that makes this snake dangerous" is also a load of crap because the same can be said of dogs and you know as well as I do that cops do not shoot every loose dog they see just because some dogs have killed people. The excuse used for the actions taken in this situation are crap. And I am using dogs as an example to highlight that. If you don't like me using dogs fine, pick some other animal my logic still holds. If it was a goat loose on the street then the cop would have been criticized for shooting it. Same if it were a rabbit. Or even a deer.

If it had been any other animal then they would have called animal control. The cop shot it cause it was a snake plain and simple. And that is WRONG and STUPID.

You are saying that it doesnt matter that boas have killed other people..that THIS snake, the one killed by the cop, was harmless..

you dont know that..and you cant say that.
there is no way you can declare that particular snake "harmless" or "a danger to no one"..

And you are saying that it does matter that boas have killed people so that THIS snake, the one killed by the cop, was not harmless. And you do not know that either so there is no way you (or the cop and the hick in the truck for that matter) can just go and declare that that particular snake was "not harmless" or "a danger to someone"

thats all im saying..it cant be said to be "harmless"..

But that is not all you are saying. You are making it an either/or situation. You are saying that because it can not be said to be "harmless" and because some where in the past some boas have killed people that therefore that particular snake can be said the be "not harmless". And that is not the case either.

and im right.

No more so than I am. But if you want to play that way we can play that way. Yes, you are right. I can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt that that particular snake was "harmless". It is my opinion that it was but that is just my opinion. However, I am also right because you can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt that that snake was "not harmless". You are of the opinion that it was "not harmless" and I will respect that. I disagree with you, but then I have that right. Just as you have the right to disagree with me.

thats my only point...

And my point (which seems to have been missed) was that 1) the cop took entirely the wrong course of action and ought not be put in the news as some kind of hero 2) the reporter ought to learn to do some real research before publishing crap that is obviously false and 3) that the newspaper as a whole ought not perpetuate the lie that all snakes are evil.

'My love was science- specifically biology and, more specifically, when placed in a common jar, which of two organisms would devour the other.'

Pyro, you keep missing one of the big things I keep saying, you can not accurately judge the situation and determine what the best coarse of action was. Should animal control have been called, yes and they may have been but might not have arrived on the scene when the officer felt the action he took was necessary. Face it police officers make judgment calls all the time and if we second guessed every one no cop would look fit to be one. I also like how all of the snake keepers are mad at the officer instead of being steamed at the one person who is really at fault, the person who owned the snake in the first place. The snake never should have been there plain and simple. If the owner had taken proper care of this animal this never would have happened.

You are assuming the motives of the officer first off, based on what appears to you to be the prevailing opinion of people in US society. How can you know he shot the snake because it was evil. If it was a dog that was lunging at people and he shot because he felt it was necessary to end the situation before animal control was present would you be all up in arms like you are now? should he have waited until someone did get hurt to take action? You can not accurately judge why the officer did what he did so how can you say the snake was killed because it was demonized?

As for dog license Ottawa county where this incident happened does require you purchase a registered dog license and keep it on your dogs collar or they are seized by animal control and you lose control of the dog. Why shouldn't the same requirements apply to other animals.

"We're terrible animals. I think that the Earth's immune system is trying to get rid of us, as well it should." - Kurt Vonnegut